While there is always a possibility of finding some other factor closely related to delinquency and independent of capacity, nevertheless we should hardly urge this possibility at the present time as overweighing the accumulation of negative evidence which has been assembled in recent years, especially at the Galton Laboratory. We should remember that many so-called outer influences are, like the temptation to drink, related to the incapacity which precedes the temptations. There is also good reason to suppose that many bad environmental surroundings result from rather than cause deficiency. Even broken homes may be a result of incapacity, to which undoubtedly early death is related. The first essential for social philosophers is to recognize that so-called environmental factors may have their corresponding inborn correlates. This is almost invariable with home conditions. The problem is to weigh the relative importance of these outer and inner factors on the same individuals. (c) WEIGHING HEREDITY AGAINST ENVIRONMENT. Both subjective and objective methods have been used in trying to determine whether heredity or environment has the most influence upon criminality. The earlier and subjective method is one for which Gruhle is perhaps the leading advocate. By this method an expert with wide experience judges the relative effect of inner and outer causes of delinquency in particular cases. In his study of 105 minor delinquents in a German industrial school Gruhle, after a thorough and systematic clinical and sociological study of each person, gave his judgment whether heredity or environment was the main cause of delinquency in the case. In his summary he concluded that in 9 cases the fundamental cause was found in the environment, in 8 cases in environment plus a subordinate influence of heredity, in 41 environment and heredity were balanced, in 20 cases heredity was the main influence but environment was a subordinate factor and in 21 heredity was considered the causal factor. This shows that, when each case was estimated separately, in his opinion heredity on the whole turned out to be more important than environment for this group. By the same subjective method Gruhle weighs the influence of family taints such as mental abnormalities, deficiency, and drunkenness as against the hereditary influence in crime, and comes to the surprising result that in 9 cases where both parents were abnormal mentally or drunken in only two cases was heredity the predominant cause of the delinquency, while in 7 cases where neither parent showed these taints the delinquency was invariably explained by heredity. The group whose delinquencies were in his opinion mainly due to heredity showed, curiously enough, less family taints from nearly every point of view. He concludes: